| Comment Number: | OL-10504018 |
| Received: | 3/8/2005 10:48:06 AM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
In regards to Performance Pay Pools and increases to basic pay. I am concerned that it appears to be very possible that somebody who earned a pay increase from the pool to their basic pay one year for good performance could perform at the same level or even higher the following year and still receive less money if others who had been rated lower the prior year improve their performance and thus earn a higher share of the performance pay pool in subsequent years. That's not right and to be honest seems to defeat the purpose of the pay pool. This would occur due to a fixed sum of money (the pay pool) being divided up 10 ways (for example purposes only) in one year, but then perhaps the following year with improved performance you'd need to divide up the same (roughly) amount of funds 15 ways. Where is the incentive for the superior employees to continue to work at such a high level when improvements in performance from other employees can take from their pay? Granted they wouldn't want to slack off because then their pay would slide farther, but it seems there ought to be some mechanism to ensure that continued high performers don't see their performance pay erode due to the improved performance of other employees. I'm not sure how that could be handled though without increasing the funds available to the performance pay pool. The potential here to have managers "fudge" ratings so that things work out in the end (ie no pay gets lost, pay pool is not exceeded)is quite obvious and is unacceptable.